OBJECTIVE: To date, numerous conventional wound dressings are employed for the management of DFUs but there is a lack of absolute and versatile choice. The current review was therefore aimed to summarize and critically discuss the available evidences related to pharmaceutical and therapeutic viability of polymer-based dressings for the treatment of DFUs.
RESULTS: A versatile range of naturally-originated polymers including chitosan (CS), hyaluronic acid (HA), cellulose, alginate, dextran, collagen, gelatin, elastin, fibrin and silk fibroin have been utilized for the treatment of DFUs. These polymers have been used in the form of hydrogels, films, hydrocolloids, foams, membranes, scaffolds, microparticles, and nanoparticles. Moreover, the wound healing viability and clinical applicability of various mutually modified, semi-synthetic or synthetic polymers have also been critically discussed.
CONCLUSION: In summary, this review enlightens the most recent developments in polymer-based wound dressings with special emphasis on advanced polymeric biomaterials, innovative therapeutic strategies and delivery approaches for the treatment of DFUs.
METHODS: This was a comparative case-control study done on patients in Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia (Hospital USM), requiring split-thickness skin grafting, whereby, the skin graft donor site was divided to almost equal halves, and applied with both gamat-based gel on one side, with Duoderm® hydrogel on the other side. The epithelialization of the wounds was observed and compared on days 10, 14 and 21. Pain score, and pruritus score were also observed. Repeated measure analysis of variance (ANOVA) test and Paired t-test was used to test statistical significance accordingly.
RESULTS: No significant differences were seen in rates of epithelialization of wounds on days 10, 14 and 21 (p > 0.01). No significant difference was also seen in the pain score and pruritus score (p > 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: A gamat-based gel is comparable to conventional hydrogels in treatment of split-skin graft donor site. No adverse effects were observed in either group.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Free buccal fat pad grafting was carried out in 15 patients in our institution. All were harvested using an intraoral approach. The buccal fat pad graft was used to correct periorbital contour depressions, nasal tip deformities, as a camouflage graft over exposed silicon nasal implants and as a filler in the depression deformity after mass excision.
RESULTS: All 15 patients demonstrated good contour deformity correction without a significant graft resorption up to 3 years of follow-up. There were no donor site complications. The amount used ranged from 1 to 5 cc in volume as a spacer or barrier for the moderate-sized volume defect or depression, even though more than 5 cc of fat graft could be harvested if required.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the buccal fat pad graft represents an easy, expedient and exceptional tool for the correction of contour deformities, volume replacement or for aesthetic augmentation.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .